While the virtual currency represented by bitcoin is favored by people, it has also become the object of criminal profit. From the perspective of dogmatics, criminal cases involving bitcoin should not be regulated by charges of monetary crimes or infringement of property law interests. "Money theory" shows that bitcoin has the same property as money by analogy from the basic functions of money, the role played by money and the basis of the issue of money. "Property theory" argues that bitcoin has property attribute from the characteristics of virtual property and the relationship between the creation of virtual property and labor. However, on the one hand, from the basic property of money, bitcoin does not meet the five basic functions of money, and the role of money does not change according to the domain in which it operates. The decentralized nature of bitcoin is designed to get rid of state control and is not compatible with the modern credit money system. On the other hand, people have not realized the possibility of management and transfer of virtual property. In addition, from the perspective of normative justification, the property attribute of virtual property is more difficult to be supported. From the perspective of interpretive theory, we cannot find the justification basis for the property attribute of virtual property. Therefore, both "money theory" and "property theory" have a blind spot in reasoning. From the perspective of national policies, bitcoin has been negatively evaluated by China's policies due to its speculative risks, easy to trigger financial crimes such as money laundering, and impact on the country's monetary system. Meanwhile, the "mining" industry wastes a lot of social resources. Protecting bitcoin under charges of monetary crimes and property interests also runs counter to national policy.